Seaman v. Ficken
Seaman v. Ficken
13 Misc. 775; 34 N.Y.S. 1148; 68 N.Y. St. Rep. 881
Opinion of the Court
In the case before ns it was just as necessary for the defendant to prove damages as it was to prove the fraud on the part of plaintiff. Testimony as to the value of the lots at Lindenhurst was competent if given by an expert. We think that Mr. McEwen was qualified to give an opinion as to their value, and that the exception at folio 122 of case was well taken. It does not become necessary to examine the other questions in the case.
Present: Clement, Ch. J., and Yan Wyok, J.
Judgment and order reversed and new trial granted, costs to abide event.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.